comments on WG rechartering procedures

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

Here are my comments on the rechartering procedures:

> Creating, Rechartering, and Closing a Working Group
> 
> 1. Creating a Working Group
> 
> The procedures for creating a new working group (WG) are as follows:
> 
>     * The AD may send a draft charter to the IESG mailing list
>       (iesg@ietf.org) for "informal" discussion. The Secretariat takes
>       no action at this time.

Note: what out to be similiar wording in recharter text is different:

>     * The AD sends an informal message to the IESG (i.e., to
>       iesg@ietf.org) containing the proposed revisions to the charter.
>

and I assume that the more precise wording here should appear for
rechartering as well (especially about the "secretariat takes no
action").

>     * The AD submits the revised charter to the Secretariat (i.e., to
>       iesg-secretary@ietf.org), and requests that the WG be placed on
>       the agenda for the next Telechat.

Note: here, new charters that are underging formal internal review do
not automatically go on the agenda. I am OK with this, but we should
all be aware, and understand this is the default.

 
> (NOTE: When the database is updated, the e-mail addresses of the new
> WG Chairs are automatically added to the WG Chairs e-mail list, a
> directory is created in the database to hold the WG charter, and the
> charter is added to the directory.)

Should also perhaps mention the area-specific WGs? And any others?
 
>                 + Updates the ID Tracker (INTERNAL PROCEDURES)
> 
>                   (NOTE: When the proposed WG is deleted from the
> "Current List" of Proposed Working Groups in the ID Tracker, it is
> automatically removed from the "Working Groups under IESG Review"
> Web page.) 
>

>                 + Creates a mailing list for the WG if requested to
                  do so by the WG Chairs, and approved by the AD
                  (INTERNAL PROCEDURES)

Note: in most cases, the mailing list is created prior to final
approval of the WG. I mention this only to be sure there isn't an
implication that WG mailing lists hosted at ietf.org can only be set
up after the WG is formally approved...

Actually, I think the above an be struck, because the procedures for
creating mailing lists would cover the issue of when to create mailing
lists.
		  
>                 + Sends a formal "WG Action" announcement to the IETF Announcement List (i.e., to ietf-announce@ietf.org) with copies to the proposed Chairs of the new WG. The standard message is as follows:
> 
>                   To: IETF-Announce
>                   Subject: WG Action: [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym])
>                   From: The IESG [iesg-secretary@ietf.org]
>                   Date: [automatically inserted]
>                   Cc: [insert e-mail address(es) of the WG Chair(s)]

Maybe this goes into a process change, but can we please cc the
newly-created WG's mailing list here (and in all the WG messages that
get sent to ietf-announce) too?
> The procedures for rechartering a working group (WG) are as follows:
> 
>     * The AD sends an informal message to the IESG (i.e., to
>       iesg@ietf.org) containing the proposed revisions to the charter.

See earlier comment. This step can presumably be bipassed, if the AD
so choses.

Finally, I notice that the following subject lines are used for
outgoing public announcements:

  Subject: WG Review: [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym])
  Subject: WG Action: [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym])
  Subject: WG Review: Recharter of [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym])
  Subject: WG Action: RECHARTER: [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym])
  Subject: WG Action: [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym]) to conclude

For the last one, WG closure, I wonder if it will be easy to miss,
because the subject field is sometimes longer than 80 characters and
will get truncated. It would be nicer to have this message look
something like:

  Subject: WG Action: Conclusion of [insert name of WG] ([insert acronym])

Thomas